SUREKHA SINGLA vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND ORS

CWP/4973/2022HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01024144202218 April 2026Author: MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL,MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI1 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

Facts

The petitioner, Surekha Singla, filed a writ petition challenging a notice dated 31.03.2021, issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for an assessment year not explicitly stated. The notice was dispatched to the petitioner on or after 01.04.2021. The respondents are the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and others. The petitioner's counsel was represented by Mr. Abhishek Sharma, and the revenue was represented by Ms. Urvashi Dhugga. The High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh heard the matter.

Held

The High Court noted that the learned counsel for the revenue conceded that the impugned notice dated 31.03.2021, dispatched to the petitioner on or after 01.04.2021, for the assessment year in question, under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, should be treated as a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act, following the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Ashish Agarwal (2023) 1 SCC 617. This concession satisfied the learned senior counsel for the petitioner. Consequently, the petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondent-revenue to proceed from the stage of the notice, in terms of the procedure laid down under Section 148A(b) of the Act. The petitioner was granted liberty to raise all possible pleas and defenses available to them during these proceedings. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether a notice issued under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 31.03.2021 and dispatched on or after 01.04.2021, for the assessment year in question, should be treated as a notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act, in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Ashish Agarwal (2023) 1 SCC 617? Assessee's Contention: The petitioner's counsel was satisfied with the revenue's concession. Revenue's Contention: The learned counsel for the revenue conceded that in terms of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Ashish Agarwal (2023) 1 SCC 617, the impugned notice dated 31.03.2021, dispatched to the petitioner on or after 01.04.2021, for the assessment year in question, under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, be treated as notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act.

Sections Cited

Section 148, Section 148A(b)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CWP-4973-2022 Date of Decision: 18.04.2026 SUREKHA SINGLA

... Petitioner Versus PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX AND OTHERS ... Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI

Present : Mr. Abhishek Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Vishal Gupta, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Ms. Urvashi Dhugga, Senior Standing Counsel, with

Mr. Vaibhav Gupta, Junior Standing Counsel, and

Ms. Kavita, Advocate, for the Income Tax Department. * * * * * DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral)

At the outset, learned counsel for the revenue concedes that in terms of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors. Vs. Ashish Agarwal (2023) 1 SCC 617, the impugned notice dated 31.03.2021, dispatched to the petitioner on or after 01.04.2021, for the assessment year in question, under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short- the Act) be treated as notice under Section 148A(b) of the Act.

2.

The above concession satisfies learned senior counsel for the petitioner. According

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →